It could even be related somewhow to the fact that both Turkish Sufis and Mongolians use the title of Khan.

The Orkhon script mentioned in the above Wikipedia article looks a lot like Runic script.

Samael Aun Weor wrote:

The script of the First Root Race was written with the Runes. The mallet of Masonry comes from the arrow of the Egyptian God Ra, and this is a Rune. In that epoch, the rituals of the Polar Temple were all runic. The movements of the officials were runic. This is the divine script.

Let us remember that the Swastika is a Rune. The Hebrew letters are but modifications of runic letters."

"The First Root Race was gigantic and black in color...."

"They are the Glacial Men, who, for the good of this poor suffering humanity, still exist."

"Individuals of such a group which correspond to the first race.... ...have preserved their original purity."

"Presently, the members of such a group, have a beautiful human size and presence similar to our own. They have perfect bodies of flesh and bone, and great wisdom. Indeed, they are the living prototype of what all of the populace of the Earth should be."

Manly P. Hall 33° wrote:"The Aryan race (of which both the modern Hindu and the Anglo-Saxon are sub-races) had its beginning somewhere in Central Asia. While Western anthropologists even admit this, they do not link this fact in any way with the Hindu belief that the race migrated from the Gobi desert, where the first white man was born."

Although perhaps better said that the Mongolian Gobi is where the first white man of the Fifth Root Race or Aryan Root Race was born (it is said that the first 'white man' actually originated with the Second Root Race or Hyperborean Root Race).

Some relate the root of the word Caucasian as originating with Caucasas as in the Caucasas Mountains, near the Hindu-Kush or Indus-Kush, the latter of which is said to have once been inhabited by Black Kushites.

I'd also like to mention again the "Little Black-Headed Man" of Tibet (see Samten Karmay The Arrow and the Spindle) in relation the "Black-Headed People" of Sumer, and the Elamites of Iran, and the Dravidians of India, etc.

And then there are many books on Anthropology in relation to Tibet, Mongolia, and Shang-Shung or Zhang-Zhung, by Chögyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche to study.

A Gnostic wrote:"Adi-Buddha is the primordial Buddha. It is the Buddha of the Buddha, the awakened of the awake. Adi-Buddha is a part of that ancient Vajrayana teaching known as Adi-Yoga, Union with the Primordial Absolute Principle (Adi-Buddha). Adi-Buddha has been symbolized as Samantabhadra-Samantabhadri. That is the equivalent to the Absolute in the highest form of Buddhism.

"Adi-Yoga is also known in some of the modern (meaning after Atlantis and the golden age of this root race) Tibetan traditions as Dzogchen and Mahamudra (the highest yoga tantra). 99% of the modern day practitioners in the physical planes who are receiving all sorts of recognition from religions and society are practicing a skeleton of the original Adi-Yoga. Therefore, without the explanations of the Avatar of Aquarius and conscious direct experience with the teachings, it is very difficult to truly understand Dzogchen, Mahamudra or the rest of modern day religious teachings wholistically. Initiatic Gnostic Kabbalah is true Atlantean Adi-Yoga (the teachings and practice of union with ADI). WITHOUT PRACTICE, THERE IS NO DIRECT UNDERSTANDING.

"Initiatic Gnostic Kabbalah was handed to Tibet by the Akaldan Society of ancient Atlantis. In Tibet, those teachings are still found under the name of Vajaryana, Adi-Yoga, etc. etc. If you study the lineages of Tibetan Buddhism, they will always say that the teachings go back to the GOLDEN ISLANDS.

"Even Atisha received teachings from the Golden Island and brought them back to Tibet. The Dzogchen lineage also says this, that the teachings came from the Golden Islands. The histories of these lineages also say that the sacred teachings can no longer be found in those islands (see the Karma of the islands of Sri Lanka, Indonesia etc).

"Obviously, those Atlantean Masters brought the teachings to Tibet over the seas. Indonesia and those Golden Islands were launch pads for the teachings from Atlantis (the Akaldan Society was located in what is now southern Mexico and Guatemala) to the first Aryan root race-Tibet."

About Mexico and Guatemala, many consider the Olmecs to be or have been associated with Merotic (as opposed to Nilotic) Africans.

And I wonder who were the Anunians, and about the land known as Alkebulan (the latter of which sounds like Akaldan which might have also been written about by Gurdjieff)....

If you're never heard of him, but are a good person, he'll reward you.

If you are devoted to him, but are a bad person, he'll punish you.

Also, it's very interesting that Tengriism is a mix of monotheism and polytheism. Tengri is the supreme god, but there are lesser gods who form an entire pantheon with the usual pagan gods (love, war, poetry, rain etc.).

Equanimity is the ground. Love is the moisture. Compassion is the seed. Bodhicitta is the result.

"All memories and thoughts are the union of emptiness and knowing, the Mind.Without attachment, self-liberating, like a snake in a knot.Through the qualities of meditating in that way,Mental obscurations are purified and the dharmakaya is attained."

As far as I understand it "Tengerism" or "Tengriism" is the more modern and preferred way to refer to what is commonly known as "Shamanism." The latter term was coined by western anthropologists and is misleading because it sounds like it's the shamans who are being worshipped, which isn't the case - they have a role similar to priests in Christianity and it's actually the ancestors who are worshipped.

catmoon wrote:K I did a quick look at the wiki article and this Tengriism seems to have very little to do with Buddhism. For starters it's theistic.

topic moved to the lounge.

I think you may have missed this related thread and the link to 'Yellow' shamansim in the Wiki article, which does indeed mix Buddhism and Shamanism, as opposed to the 'Black' shamans who have no Buddhist practices:

Personally, I find it hard to see doughball, mirror and oracle trance divination by Tibetan Buddhists more 'Buddhist' than similar divination by a Tibetan or Mongolian shaman. In the end the only difference is that one may be appealing to a Buddha, another to Tengri as an enlightened deity.

They may also share deities, such as 'he who shall not be named on DW'.

Martyn wrote:As far as I understand it "Tengerism" or "Tengriism" is the more modern and preferred way to refer to what is commonly known as "Shamanism." The latter term was coined by western anthropologists and is misleading because it sounds like it's the shamans who are being worshipped, which isn't the case - they have a role similar to priests in Christianity and it's actually the ancestors who are worshipped.

This is a good book on the subject:

Dreamtime and Inner Space: World of the Shaman

Thanks.

I am really looking for specific text on Tengri(i)sm and the deity known as Tengri.

Martyn wrote:As far as I understand it "Tengerism" or "Tengriism" is the more modern and preferred way to refer to what is commonly known as "Shamanism." The latter term was coined by western anthropologists and is misleading because it sounds like it's the shamans who are being worshipped, which isn't the case - they have a role similar to priests in Christianity and it's actually the ancestors who are worshipped.

This is a good book on the subject:

Dreamtime and Inner Space: World of the Shaman

Thanks.

I am really looking for specific text on Tengri(i)sm and the deity known as Tengri.

Hello Blue Garuda,

I know that the following might not be exactly what you are looking for, but it may still provide some useful pointers in the right direction:

It could even be related somewhow to the fact that both Turkish Sufis and Mongolians use the title of Khan.

more plausible: Turkish & Mongolian are both Turkic languages, and hence would share cognates.

Mongolian is not a Turkic language, and no linguists makes that claim. Some still classify it in the contested Altaic language family, but the work of eminent linguists, including Juha Janhunen and András Róna-Tas, is leading many to conclude that there is no genetic relationship between the Mongolic and Turkic families. Lexical similarities can be accounted for by many layers of borrowings between the two languages. Róna-Tas's work with R-Turkic languages is fantastic for demonstrating this. The grammatical similarities are also increasingly being considered the result of long areal contact.

Anyway, the main thrust of your point still stands since the many forms of Khan, Qaγan, and other political terms are prominent amongst the mutual borrowings.

Thanks for the correction. I'd thought both were Altaic languages, but since I haven't been in a linguistics classroom in nearly twenty years, well...

I think it's generally advisable to look for straightforward explanations for linguistic and cultural phenomena in everyday life and history, rather than in the (ahem) rather more obscure authorities cited elsewhere in this thread.

Jikan wrote:I think it's generally advisable to look for straightforward explanations for linguistic and cultural phenomena in everyday life and history, rather than in the (ahem) rather more obscure authorities cited elsewhere in this thread.